Mafiascum.net

In post 871, DiamondSentinel wrote:

In post 864, Jake The Wolfie wrote:

In post 861, DiamondSentinel wrote:It's begging for you to agree with them, or at the very least grant his reads merit. In my experience, it's been a horrible scum-tell, where a player asking for someone to validate their reads is just trying make them seem legitimate.

This wasn't asking for validation though? This was asking for feedback, as in "Do you agree or disagree with my reads?"
"

See, that's where you're wrong, buddy.

It's not just about what people say, but

why do they say it

? And specifically, why do they say it how they say it? Instead of saying "what do you think of my reads", why did they not say "what reads do you have on X, Y, and Z people?" The former has an inherent assertion that the reads have merit of their own, and it's a clever way to normalize someone's opinions.

PEdit: So a couple things.
I do know Cabd's personality, and it's not just personality that I'm reading. I've glanced at some of his recent games and this behavior is a bit off compared to those.
Additionally, at this point (this early in the game), working together should always be viewed with scrutiny. Even if they're metabuddies, any amount of immediate comradery should be viewed under the microscope.
And finally, I

have

looked at that possibility that he is trying to read your reaction, and I just don't find that credible. It doesn't hold much water. Anyone can react to someone's reads. It's, in my experience, one of the weaker types of ways to read people.

In post 736, fferyllt wrote:I'm going to elaborate a little on my 731.

Syr, Cabd and midwaybear have expectations of bell's play, somewhat informed by meta. petapan has much of the most salient meta front and center of his brain, too.

You three come to the same conclusion about Bell's alignment without openly discussing it.

I did not come to that conclusion, and at the point where Syr vocalized the meta, I went on high alert to see what happens next.

petapan happens next. Which means that he didn't reach my conclusion. But, why would he wait until the meta info hit the thread before voting if he was in the "I miss Avenger" camp?

In post 772, Cabd wrote:

In post 763, Syryana wrote:I can't do it
UNVOTE:

I can't not give Bell time and pizza if we're already giving other people I don't love as much time and pizza

Ffery if we had scum!Bell and I let you talk me out of it I'm never letting you hear the end of it

Now i need a new target. Hm. Back later.

You are severely mistaken as to the deepest meaning of pizza, and I don't intend to dish out any more clarity.

In post 775, Syryana wrote:

In post 772, Cabd wrote:You are severely mistaken as to the deepest meaning of pizza, and I don't intend to dish out any more clarity.

Frankly I don't care, deciphering morph-speak is more work than I intend to put into anything this game or any game

My point was I'm okay with not killing Bell rn, which you of course knew

fferyllt wrote:I haven't townbinned Bell. I'm leaning a little in that direction, partly because I don't expect Avenger any more than I expect Assassin, and because I liked that he entertained the idea of working with me, and I liked that (it appeared) he put his guard up a little about my (actually Cabd's!) scumgame when I told the tale of the evil neighborhood.

My play's pretty different here, too. The amount of spine I'm feeling while playing on my main is promising! I hope it lasts.

Yah watching the morph heads go at it in the opening pages was fascinating and for the moment I'm okay being led around by the nose by you a bit

In post 871, DiamondSentinel wrote:

In post 864, Jake The Wolfie wrote:

In post 861, DiamondSentinel wrote:It's begging for you to agree with them, or at the very least grant his reads merit. In my experience, it's been a horrible scum-tell, where a player asking for someone to validate their reads is just trying make them seem legitimate.

This wasn't asking for validation though? This was asking for feedback, as in "Do you agree or disagree with my reads?"
"

See, that's where you're wrong, buddy.

It's not just about what people say, but why do they say it? And specifically, why do they say it how they say it? Instead of saying "what do you think of my reads", why did they not say "what reads do you have on X, Y, and Z people?" The former has an inherent assertion that the reads have merit of their own, and it's a clever way to normalize someone's opinions.

In post 878, SirCakez wrote:Is this why there is a Bell wagon? Insider meta that was not really shared with the thread? Hmm ok..

In post 881, SirCakez wrote:Nahdia might also be scum here. Her posting earlier felt really forced and now she's been absent for most of today. Disengaged Nahdia does not make a town Nahdia.

In post 852, Jake The Wolfie wrote:

In post 850, Cabd wrote:

In post 848, Jake The Wolfie wrote:

In post 847, petapan wrote:my feeling on jake is he's probably going to get himself yeeted at some point this game and i have no idea which way he'll flip

I specifically joined a Large game to avoid getting executed first.

Is there a reason that you're so unwilling to put in heavy lifting, then?

I fear that whatever I say will always be turned against me, even if it's the towniest thing that has ever been done before, and I'll end up as the first blood again.

In post 867, Tammy wrote:You're right that's a horrible scum tell! About as bad as the "I'll pick back up at post #" scum tell.

Why can't it be him reading me by my reaction to his reads or him trying to gauge where my head it at to see if we're on the same page? Why can't it be two people working together?

The rest of the things you pointed out look like you're scum reading personality or play style rather than things that are actually scummy. And maybe you got fixated on the things you did because someone asked you about the group of us.

On the one hand, I kinda like it because sometimes people get squicked when they don't understand the friend dynamics and how people interact who've played a lot together and are friends in real life. On the other, I'm wondering if you realize you're reading personalities as scum rather than behavior.

@Diamond Sentinel

In post 883, petapan wrote:

In post 881, SirCakez wrote:Nahdia might also be scum here. Her posting earlier felt really forced and now she's been absent for most of today. Disengaged Nahdia does not make a town Nahdia.

*their

In post 876, midwaybear wrote:VOTE: Pooky
better than Bell for now

In post 882, petapan wrote:

In post 878, SirCakez wrote:Is this why there is a Bell wagon? Insider meta that was not really shared with the thread? Hmm ok..

eh not for me, mostly it was see cabd's vote, go back and look at bell's ISO to see if i can see whatever he sees, saw Bell was being super active lurker-ish so i followed the vote

In post 884, DiamondSentinel wrote:PEdit: Absolutely. Just because you disagree with someone's reads does not mean that they are not legit. Legitimate reads are reads that are working towards solving the game, not sowing discord. There are many people I've had disagreeing reads with historically that I also did not for a second doubt were town, and they truly meant those reads (and there are a fair few people who's said the same thing)

SirCakez wrote:

In post 882, petapan wrote:

In post 878, SirCakez wrote:Is this why there is a Bell wagon? Insider meta that was not really shared with the thread? Hmm ok..

eh not for me, mostly it was see cabd's vote, go back and look at bell's ISO to see if i can see whatever he sees, saw Bell was being super active lurker-ish so i followed the vote

I have not gotten that vibe from Bell. And Cabd's vote remains completely unexplained so not giving me any confidence there.

SirCakez wrote:

In post 882, petapan wrote:

In post 878, SirCakez wrote:Is this why there is a Bell wagon? Insider meta that was not really shared with the thread? Hmm ok..

eh not for me, mostly it was see cabd's vote, go back and look at bell's ISO to see if i can see whatever he sees, saw Bell was being super active lurker-ish so i followed the vote

I have not gotten that vibe from Bell. And Cabd's vote remains completely unexplained so not giving me any confidence there.

In post 816, petapan wrote:

In post 778, Gamma Emerald wrote:So you voted me less because you thought I was scummy and more because you wanted a reaction?

How do you prefer to play as town?

no, i thought you were scummy, it was just a more productive use of my vote to put it on you and see what you'd say. moved it back to bell when he was actually around.

still trying to find my stride comng back from a long hiatus but the way i liked to play was not try to think about the game broadly, just pick someone i felt was scummy and tunnel them until they towntold or i got them killed

In post 893, midwaybear wrote:Yeah yeah let’s see you keep your vote on one person for the whole day.

In post 889, Tammy wrote:? How is that bias?

In post 891, PookyTheMagicalBear wrote:SC is probly scum - he's way too sweet here.

I'd vote him but MWB still hasn't apologized for causing the death of poor Eliza yet.

In post 892, petapan wrote:but yes i am still waiting for Nahdia to give me a reason to think they're town

SirCakez wrote:

In post 882, petapan wrote:

In post 878, SirCakez wrote:Is this why there is a Bell wagon? Insider meta that was not really shared with the thread? Hmm ok..

eh not for me, mostly it was see cabd's vote, go back and look at bell's ISO to see if i can see whatever he sees, saw Bell was being super active lurker-ish so i followed the vote

I have not gotten that vibe from Bell. And Cabd's vote remains completely unexplained so not giving me any confidence there.

i did but i'm not going to iso-dive for you on a read i no longer have conviction in

SirCakez wrote:

In post 882, petapan wrote:

In post 878, SirCakez wrote:Is this why there is a Bell wagon? Insider meta that was not really shared with the thread? Hmm ok..

eh not for me, mostly it was see cabd's vote, go back and look at bell's ISO to see if i can see whatever he sees, saw Bell was being super active lurker-ish so i followed the vote

I have not gotten that vibe from Bell. And Cabd's vote remains completely unexplained so not giving me any confidence there.

the explanation is in 817, which i predict you will not like

In post 890, Jake The Wolfie wrote:

In post 884, DiamondSentinel wrote:PEdit: Absolutely. Just because you disagree with someone's reads does not mean that they are not legit. Legitimate reads are reads that are working towards solving the game, not sowing discord. There are many people I've had disagreeing reads with historically that I also did not for a second doubt were town, and they truly meant those reads (and there are a fair few people who's said the same thing)

Wait, you're getting me confused. What's the differences between

Merit

,

Normalize

, and

Legit

?